Sep 27, 2013

To change anti-science activists' minds, go beyond science

... The proponents of GM rice and its benefits clearly have positive
intentions, and they are understandably upset. Some of the pieces
decrying the acts of the crop vandals explicitly refer to these activists as being “anti-science”.

But to dismiss this, and similar, disagreements as ipso facto reflecting an anti-science mentality is not only simplistic, it’s actively misguided. ...

... Rejection of some science and the relevant supporting evidence is not, on its own, a rejection of all science. ...

...I do, however, work with the sciences. And for scientists I have four suggestions.

Change your language, change your mindset. When people oppose
something you see as science-based, it does not necessarily mean they
oppose science. To approach the world this way is unlikely to be productive (and is probably also just plain incorrect).

Science practice is not immune from bias and self-interest, nor is scientific research free from cultural influence (consider halal vaccines, for example) .

Some people have very good reasons to be suspicious of scientists
and science. In the last week, for example, a researcher from Tufts
University was barred from doing research
with humans after feeding GM golden rice to Chinese study participants
without informing them it had been genetically modified. I’d be peeved.

Explore, understand and accept that science doesn’t know
everything. Take your time if this is difficult, but try to accept this
broadly, and come to terms with it deeply. There are complexities
inherent in human interactions that invoking “science” doesn’t magically
nullify. This is not some vague, post-modernist, anti-science position:
it’s just true. If it weren’t, then problems such as this golden rice
brawl would not occur.

If scientists genuinely want to take the highest possible moral
position (and I believe we should), a broad view of humanity is
essential. If we want people to change a position, view or practice,
scorching them with righteous fire is not the best way.

That’s being as naïve about human nature as your opponents appear to be about science.